billy beane
Banned
What happened on Twitter? I had only heard about his rant at GDC.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Jeremy Parish: Where do Gamers Draw the Line Between Creators and Creations?
- Thread starter chickdigger802
- Start date
I avoided buying or playing Shadow Complex (even though I wanted to) due to the connection to Card. I won't pay for Fez, but I got a code via workI've yet to decide if I'm willing to give Fish my time or not.
Will my choices make a difference in the grand scheme of things? Nope. But it's still a decision that I can make on a personal level.
Will my choices make a difference in the grand scheme of things? Nope. But it's still a decision that I can make on a personal level.
It's really easy to draw the line when it's a matter of how much involvement there was.
Phil Fish was the largest driving force in Fez and I'm content not supporting him. Reckoning, on the other hand, was more or less developed solely by Big Huge Games. So if I pick up Reckoning down the line, while the pervasive feeling that I indirectly supported a scummy person is pervasive, it's a lot easier to digest given the pool of talent I am supporting.
Then you get weird middlegrounds like Shadow Complex. I'm still not entirely sure how I feel about buying that one.
Edit: The Itagaki accusation seems fucked to bring up. I don't think anything ever actually came of that.
Phil Fish was the largest driving force in Fez and I'm content not supporting him. Reckoning, on the other hand, was more or less developed solely by Big Huge Games. So if I pick up Reckoning down the line, while the pervasive feeling that I indirectly supported a scummy person is pervasive, it's a lot easier to digest given the pool of talent I am supporting.
Then you get weird middlegrounds like Shadow Complex. I'm still not entirely sure how I feel about buying that one.
Edit: The Itagaki accusation seems fucked to bring up. I don't think anything ever actually came of that.
CecilRousso
Member
If I know that the main creator of a game is someone that I don´t want to support, then I could skip the game. It would have to be something much more serious than someone not liking japanese games, but I still could skip it.
But I do make a difference between a games main creator, and someone just making a very small part of it, or just being part of the marketing side of it or something like that. I don´t boycott Monkey Island 1 and Gilbert, Schafer and Grossman, just because Orson Scott Card wrote some dialogue lines it.
It is important for me that I want to support the ones making the game. For example, I don´t feel very enthusiastic about purchasing EA games anymore, because I feel that they stand for so many things that are just wrong.
But I do make a difference between a games main creator, and someone just making a very small part of it, or just being part of the marketing side of it or something like that. I don´t boycott Monkey Island 1 and Gilbert, Schafer and Grossman, just because Orson Scott Card wrote some dialogue lines it.
It is important for me that I want to support the ones making the game. For example, I don´t feel very enthusiastic about purchasing EA games anymore, because I feel that they stand for so many things that are just wrong.
Interesting that a lot of people in this thread have supported the idea of not purchasing Shadow Complex due to Card's involvement. At the time, the thread was full of people saying "It's just a game! I'm going to buy two copies to cancel out your non-purchase!" That was one of the few times gaf has really disappointed me.
T
Transhuman
Unconfirmed Member
If you don't get too focused on Fish's reply, he was responding to a pretty low personal attack, and although it's petty, childish, and not at all what I would have done, I can understand him coming back with an inflammatory attack of his own.
So if you had to choose you wouldn't have bought Dragon Quest, even though there's plenty of other people who aren't rape apologists who stand to get royalties? You'd spite them just because someone who you don't like worked on the game as well?
You realize denying the rape of nanjing and many of Japan's other actions during WWII is basically on the same level as a holocaust denier. Just cause people dont talk about those things as much doesnt mean they didnt happen.
Laughing Banana
Weeping Pickle
It's sad seeing a work of labor from so many different people getting shafted due to one person that may seem more prominent/public than his/her team members.
Well since I am of Chinese heritage, this situation is particularly offensive to me. I probably won't buy another Dragon Quest game again if he's still the composer. Yea it sucks that all the other people involved with the game have to suffer my lost sale because of one idiot, but maybe that's why Squeenix should consider not hiring people who publicly spew hate. People always say "vote with your wallet" and that's precisely what I'm doing here. I don't understand why we can choose to boycott games over relatively trivial things like, "Call of Duty not having dedicated servers", or "not buying Bioware games because they fucked up the last few games" but choosing to boycott a game because you don't want your money going to someone perpuating hateful lies is unacceptable. In any of those cases, surely the majority of the people involved with those games probably had nothing to do with its faults.
I generally don't care if the creator of a good product is a dick as long as his product doesn't promote dickery.
Additionally i don't trust media to make an accurate picture of a person especially if it gets in the way of a good story.
and if we hated every product created by bad people we would possess very few things.
edit: and yeah if you downplay japans actions during ww2 you may as well be a holocaust denier, shit was bad, even if no one in the west talks about it.
Additionally i don't trust media to make an accurate picture of a person especially if it gets in the way of a good story.
and if we hated every product created by bad people we would possess very few things.
edit: and yeah if you downplay japans actions during ww2 you may as well be a holocaust denier, shit was bad, even if no one in the west talks about it.
After claiming he was sorry about how he'd phrased things, Fish took to twitter to keep talking about it and make witty comments. (Two Japanese games taped together, etc.) The next day after winning at the IGF, he returned to twitter to tell his critics to suck his dick. After several days of engaging with his critics in this hostile fashion, he then appeared in several articles written by his friends in the gaming press about how this whole experience had just been so hard on him and how really he's the victim when you think about it, just look at all the mean things strangers online said.
And like others have said: holy shit at the Sugiyama thing.
Probably shouldn't choose to be the face of the entertainment product you're creating to sell to people if you can't handle strangers talking shit about you on the internet without making an ass of yourself in return. Denis Dyack had actually created things of value before having his public fit and people still turned on him. What exactly does he expect in response to his "I'm such a lovable asshole who always speaks my mind unfiltered" routine?
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I'd be open to buying a line of hair products endorsed by Ahmadinejad
T
Transhuman
Unconfirmed Member
I doubt he mentioned that in his job interview, and besides, the guy is entitled to his crazy mess-up beliefs.
Because in the first two cases, for some, that would completely destroy any enjoyment they get out of the game (or they just feel like pouting). In the case of Sugiyama, I very much doubt the advertisement he paid for convinced people that Japanese war-crimes are excusable, and though it probably dredged up some raw feelings, it's just a messed-up guy trying to justify his messed-up beliefs.
Pretty much, but it's not as though he's going to use all the earnings to make a school that teaches people to respond immaturely to twitter comments. Some people just can't shrug off public criticism without making idiots of themselves. If he does it again, i'd be surprised.
I remember hearing about the Sugiyama thing a while ago and thinking what a shit he was. Pretty sure Gamasutra did an article about it a few years ago from what I can recall.
Anyway in my personal life I try not to hold grudges because they generally mutate in to horrible and dark things. I love the Dragon Quest music immensely but a lot of that attachment is steeped on to the games themselves; when I listen to Prologue from DQ3 all I can see is a lone figure on a path in front of a massive waterfall, or the dungeon music from DQ5 and I envision the hero as a child walking through the very first cavern in the game. Thankfully whatever crazy nationalism Sugiyama contains within that ancient skull of his has not been produced through the Dragon Quest music collectively.
Is his stance forgivable? No, especially when it ties indirectly to things that have happened in the past concerning my own family and my partner's family. Does it affect my enjoyment of what he produces? Only if I concentrate on the meaningless bullshit he has said and done in the past.
Thankfully games are usually an entertainment medium first, a political agenda second. I recall receiving a few PMs due to my somewhat negative synopsis about the "Phil Fish vs Japanese games" debacle and my reasoning for the bulletpoint list being portrayed as such was due to the atmosphere of the thread itself. I even delved a bit further and explained in a reply where I myself stood on the issue:
Perhaps people that live in those black or white backgrounds of straight conviction don't like that grey area that I enjoy standing in. I have my own convictions and my own beliefs and I don't allow the circumstances to collide against one another in regards to the arts. In a way it is similar to an argument I throw around sometimes - "despite not being religious, and not enjoying religion as a whole, that does not give me the right to dismiss righteous and sound words written in the Bible, or attributed to Muhammad, or stop me from listening to the greatness of Bach, or admire the beauty of art that was commissioned by the Church."
Perhaps a far easier and understandable anecdote follows: "There's no reason to hate the German people because of one man's atrocities."
Anyway in my personal life I try not to hold grudges because they generally mutate in to horrible and dark things. I love the Dragon Quest music immensely but a lot of that attachment is steeped on to the games themselves; when I listen to Prologue from DQ3 all I can see is a lone figure on a path in front of a massive waterfall, or the dungeon music from DQ5 and I envision the hero as a child walking through the very first cavern in the game. Thankfully whatever crazy nationalism Sugiyama contains within that ancient skull of his has not been produced through the Dragon Quest music collectively.
Is his stance forgivable? No, especially when it ties indirectly to things that have happened in the past concerning my own family and my partner's family. Does it affect my enjoyment of what he produces? Only if I concentrate on the meaningless bullshit he has said and done in the past.
Thankfully games are usually an entertainment medium first, a political agenda second. I recall receiving a few PMs due to my somewhat negative synopsis about the "Phil Fish vs Japanese games" debacle and my reasoning for the bulletpoint list being portrayed as such was due to the atmosphere of the thread itself. I even delved a bit further and explained in a reply where I myself stood on the issue:
speedpop said:
Perhaps people that live in those black or white backgrounds of straight conviction don't like that grey area that I enjoy standing in. I have my own convictions and my own beliefs and I don't allow the circumstances to collide against one another in regards to the arts. In a way it is similar to an argument I throw around sometimes - "despite not being religious, and not enjoying religion as a whole, that does not give me the right to dismiss righteous and sound words written in the Bible, or attributed to Muhammad, or stop me from listening to the greatness of Bach, or admire the beauty of art that was commissioned by the Church."
Perhaps a far easier and understandable anecdote follows: "There's no reason to hate the German people because of one man's atrocities."
dragonlife
Member
Wow, I had no idea about Sugiyama. Pretty shocking.
Also, I bought Shadow Complex before the controversy reached my ears, but I admit I was a bit "=/" when I heard about it. It didn't stop me from playing the game, but it just felt a bit wrong.
Also, I bought Shadow Complex before the controversy reached my ears, but I admit I was a bit "=/" when I heard about it. It didn't stop me from playing the game, but it just felt a bit wrong.
And he has every right so say what he wants to say, just like I have every right to choose not to support his speech. Also, Squeenix has to be aware of his public remarks so they can always choose not to give him any more work.
Well knowing that he worked on the game destroys any enjoyment I might get out of it and also it might also make it harder for me to live with myself for giving him money. So there's that.
I also don't really see how whether his message was successful has anything to do with this. Just because most of the world isn't buying the message the KKK is selling doesn't mean I would be okay with giving them money.
Kenshin001
Member
That whole piece just seemed about making Parish feel better about his review.
Pretty sure he actually said, "Your games just suck." Not sure why people keep paraphrasing or downplaying what the asshat said. Not that it matters, someone could be a racist, Jew hating Holocaust denier and people would still buy their games if they are any good.
Pretty sure he actually said, "Your games just suck." Not sure why people keep paraphrasing or downplaying what the asshat said. Not that it matters, someone could be a racist, Jew hating Holocaust denier and people would still buy their games if they are any good.
Nailed it. Bigoted people are not going to receive a dime of my money. For the same reason I avoid any film starring Russell Crowe or Mark Walhberg or Mel Gibson.
Riposte
Member
So you'll do so after they are dead?
MightyHedgehog
Member
I totally get and respect those that choose to not purchase a product because a person behind it is an asshole. It's your money, your life, your reasons. Me, though, I buy what I like despite the creator. I've met and known too many artists of varying disciplines who create awesome (and, in some cases, very popular) shit that are fundamentally assholes with terrible ideas and following what I view as questionable to reprehensible ideologies. Doesn't bother me. If the product espouses what I find to be blatantly questionable messaging that I find in direct violation of that essential spirit of entertainment, I have no problem with not buying it. It's all down to the creation itself, IMO.
maybe you should read up on how hideously evil the Japanese actually were during WW2 before you call him a simple nationalist. In my eyes hes just as bad as the european neo-nazis denying the holocaust
If the person working at cola paid a national ad with his hateful message and the company let him continue as an employee continuing to do it I would stop buying cola products. If it was a simple white trash nazi just working on the floor I would not know about it. Also most responsible modern companies have policies against racism and similar views among its employees. Any employee with a public persona would be fired since they would taint the brand.
Then again you need to remember how conservative and passively racist Japanese culture can be - not only that but they continue to see women as ticking time-bombs who are forced out the backdoor as soon as they get married and pregnant. I'm certainly not surprised that the man is continually relied upon to create the music for the series despite his ideas.
That certainly does not excuse him from criticism however.
Try to separate the writing from the writer.
jump_button
Banned
When you support a game you support it makers too, and I don't give a shit about what prizes it won I make my own mind up, game that owe alot to other game should't talk shit about them
Too many so called Indie games are just clones, take too much from others to give the game a Identity and nostalgia If I want that ill go play them
Too many so called Indie games are just clones, take too much from others to give the game a Identity and nostalgia If I want that ill go play them
It depends on what they've done. There's a huge difference between a guy being provoked on Twitter and biting back and a guy who denies the rape and murder of 300,000 people and paying for an ad in a newspaper to spread his views. One is a view that stays with you for the rest of your life (or at least until you see the light) and the other is a one off event. You'd have to be insane to group the two together.
T
Transhuman
Unconfirmed Member
Fez doesn't owe it's vision to modern Japanese video gaming, and that's what he was asked to give his opinion on. Obviously there's a colossal difference between saying "I don't like video games made in Japan today" and "Japanese people are incapable of making good video games".
Japanese guy says Japanese gaming is getting worse: probably right. American guy says current Japanese games suck, probably racist.
Everyone has a right to spend his or her money supporting the things, people, or places that he or she chooses. It's nobody's damn business to tell people they don't have that right or that they shouldn't exercise it, nor to place it into question. If I don't like you, I'm not going to give you money.
Bobs Big Boy
Member
I don't understand the backlash. Most of my favorite authors are the biggest assholes and have horrible opinions on politics and things irrelevant to why I enjoy their writing.
I'm sorry, but his "critics"? People were being an ass to him on the internet, he was an ass right back at them.
It's offensive to put this little drama anywhere near the Sugiyama thing at all.
Umm, its in this thread because this thread is about lines between creator and product, not because of Sugiyama. Stop acting surprised that Fish's comments appeared in this thread. Noone is equating those two seperate instances, people are merely listing examples of what the OP is mentioning.
Thats what the thread is about.
This, I find it so odd that people protest folks choosing to spend their money as they choose. You dont get to decide for me how offensive I consider what a game creator does, and you dont get to choose whether I will support these people and the games they helped make either. Deal with it.
Muffdraul
Member
Huh.
*goes home and puts original copies of Abe's Oddyssey, Abe's Exoddus, Munch's Oddyssey and Stranger's Wrath down the garbage disposal*
It's like people treat being a gamer as some mandate that any game which comes along that is unique, interesting, or niche enough must be supported regardless of whether the creator of said game is a massive prick or not. Funny thing, I've been a gamer for 30 years - I never agreed to that stipulation, nor would I ever.
The fact that there's backlash against the backlash against the backlash, etc. and so on is perverse. I don't have to buy a Tim Tebow jersey because people think he's a damn saint and I don't have to financially support someone I consider to be an asshole.
That's life.
Obviously, it would be dishonest to say that anything a developer believes in somehow changes the final result, and I'm not one to deny myself something I want to play. If a developer of a game I'm interested in did something that bothered me enough to make me not want to indirectly give their company an insignificant amount of cash, I'd still have to play the game in one way or another.
So selective paraphrasing to make your point is okay now? Smarten up.
I'm more inclined to put stock in the opinion of someone who's shipped a title or two - of note or otherwise. Inafune's track record is pretty clear.
I'll take it on a case by case basis. In Fez's case, it's not a game that's going to come out for any platform I own, so it doesn't really matter. Otherwise, it generally comes down to how bad I think the creator's tomfoolery is, to what extent that idiocy comes across in the game, how much of the game is otherwise a personal statement by the creator, and relatively how much the creator in question benefits from my purchase, relative to the other members of the dev team.
I'm sure plenty of games I've bought have had complete assholes on the development team. If I let the creator get in the way of the creation, should I do an investigation for every game I buy to make sure the team that worked on it is squeaky clean? And should I apply this type of thinking to everything that I purchase?
I buy games that I'm interested in and that I will enjoy. I'm sure the money made from me has gone towards things that I don't agree with, but that happens other places in life as well (such as taxes).
I buy games that I'm interested in and that I will enjoy. I'm sure the money made from me has gone towards things that I don't agree with, but that happens other places in life as well (such as taxes).
No one is suggesting that you do a full-on investigation about the personalities and eccentricities of each and every person who has worked on a game you're interested in. It's when that information becomes readily available that it is within every consumer's right to choose whether to support that product or not.
It's also your right to not care what their opinions are and purchase things as you like. In the end, the extent to which you value something and how you arrive at that value is personal - and, frankly, no one else's business.
Other thing: Inafune: pissed at his old bosses and telling them they suck. Fish: pissed at some random Japanese guy coming to an indie games panel and telling him he sucks.
MarshMellow96
Member
I can draw an uneasy line at activity. Card actively campaigning against gay rights? Okay, that's not happening... But Fish simply being a massive asshole? I can live with that in the same way that I can live with buying EDGE knowing that Leigh Alexander probably gets a paycheck out of it. It's relatively harmless.
If he starts a 'Japan Sucks' campaign, however, all bets are off.
If he starts a 'Japan Sucks' campaign, however, all bets are off.
I get what you're saying, but end users are end users. That said, I can confidently say that current Japanese games are mostly shit WITHOUT shipping any titles.
When SquareEnix regularly alters the definition of "nadir", it's refreshing to hear someone speak out against their shitty games.
If I limited myself to entertainment made only by those I agreed with on every issue, my life would be much, much sadder. I don't care who is involved in the making of a game - if it's good, I will buy it. If Miyamoto came out as a neo-Nazi, I would still be there Day One for the next Mario or Zelda game.
cartman414
Member
It's also the tone and context.
Also, IMO: It depends a lot on what role the... objectionable... staffer is in. Listening to Sugiyama isn't going to turn me into an IJA apologist any more than listening to Wagner is gonna turn me into a proto-Nazi, and to borrow Pre's example stomping Koopas isn't going to make me want to curbstomp my great-uncle even if Miyamoto was to turn up Neo-Nazi. A writer has far more room to weave in objectionable themes than a composer or gameplay designer, and I'm a lot more likely to steer clear of iffy writers like Card.
LightofRohan
Member
It's just the fact that the internet population is insanely huge now and vocalizing your opinion is ridiculously easy. And everyone hates something and everyone likes to preach about what they hate. So everything is just a lot louder then it was 5-10 years ago...
And due to being easier to voice your opinion, people feel their opinion matters more. And they feel they can change/attribute to everything, to the point where so much passion is riled up over stupid things.
There is nothing that is 100% free of criticism. It's like the speed of light (from what I know) the closer you get to lightspeed the harder it is to achieve it. The closer you get to 100% love, the harder it is to achieve. Because there will always be those that hate something just because everyone else likes it.
And due to being easier to voice your opinion, people feel their opinion matters more. And they feel they can change/attribute to everything, to the point where so much passion is riled up over stupid things.
There is nothing that is 100% free of criticism. It's like the speed of light (from what I know) the closer you get to lightspeed the harder it is to achieve it. The closer you get to 100% love, the harder it is to achieve. Because there will always be those that hate something just because everyone else likes it.
Similar threads
- Locked